Stay abreast with the latest developments in the professional domain along with in-depth analysis through the monthly BCA Journal. Get access to an engaging library of researched publications from the BCAS stable.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreA voluntary organisation established on 6th July 1949, BCAS has presently more than 9,000 members from all over the country. BCAS is a principle-centered and learning-oriented organisation promoting quality service and excellence in the profession of Chartered Accountancy.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn MoreLorem Ipsum has been the industry's standard dummy text ever since the 1500s, when an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.
Learn More
The following principles emante out of this decision of the Supreme Court in relation to the Circulars issued by the Government under the fiscal laws (Income-tax Act and Central Excise Act):
1. Although a circular is not binding on a court or an assessee, it is not open to the Revenue to raise a contention that is contrary to a binding Circular by the Board. While a circular remains in operation, the Revenue is bound by it and cannot be allowed to plead that is not valid nor that it is contrary to the terms of the statute.
2. A show cause notice and demand contrary to the existing Circulars of the Board are ab initio bad.
3. It is not open to the Revenue to advance an argument or file an appeal contrary to the Circulars.
The above legal position is re-emphasised in Commissioner of Customs vs. Indian Oil Corporation (AIR 2004 SC 2799: 2004 AIR SCW 1310) has been followed in UOI vs. Arviva Inds. (I) Ltd.: (2007) 209 ELT 5 (SC)
4. It is well settled that if the departmental Circular provides an interpretation which runs contrary to the provisions of law, such interpretation will not bind the Court.